Joseph M Walker v. Workers Compensation Agency, 328721

Walker, injured in Ohio while employed by a Michigan subcontractor (Metropolitan), disputed denial of workers’ compensation benefits and contested authenticity of a WC-Form 400 used as proof of Metropolitan’s insurance.
Metropolitan submitted a WC-Form 400 (dated Jan 14, 2013; form revision noted Feb 2013) during a workers’ compensation proceeding; Walker suspected it was inauthentic or post-dated.
Walker submitted FOIA requests to the Michigan Workers’ Compensation Agency (WCA) seeking records about the origin of the WC-Form 400; WCA responded it had no information about the document’s origin and denied possession of the requested document.
Walker sued the WCA in the Court of Claims under the Records Reproduction Act seeking expungement and a written acknowledgment that the form was eradicated; the Court of Claims dismissed for lack of jurisdiction (suggesting mandamus belonged in circuit court).
Walker then filed in circuit court; the WCA moved for summary disposition under MCR 2.116(C)(8) arguing Walker failed to state a cognizable claim and that the authenticity issue belonged in the workers’ compensation forum.
The circuit court granted summary disposition; Walker appealed, challenging (1) need to litigate form authenticity before the workers’ compensation magistrate and (2) availability of a remedy under the Records Reproduction Act.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether Walker could obtain circuit-court relief on WC-Form 400 authenticity before magistrate resolution	Walker: circuit court can review and expunge the form’s record independently of workers’ compensation proceedings	WCA: authenticity/admissibility disputes must be raised before the workers’ compensation magistrate; workers’ comp is exclusive remedy	Held: authenticity dispute belonged in workers’ compensation proceedings; magistrate (and appellate remedies) are the appropriate forum
Whether the Records Reproduction Act provides a private cause of action to nullify a government record	Walker: Act supports expungement/declaring the form unusable and requires remediation	WCA: Act governs record reproduction standards but does not create private remedies to nullify records	Held: Records Reproduction Act does not create an individual remedy to expunge or nullify records; no private cause of action under the Act

Joseph v. Auto Club Ins. Ass’n, 491 Mich 200 (2012) (standard of review for summary disposition)
Maiden v. Rozwood, 461 Mich 109 (1999) (MCR 2.116(C)(8) pleading standard)
Gorman v. Am. Honda Motor Co., 302 Mich App 113 (2013) (accept factual allegations as true on C(8) review)
Wade v. Dep’t of Corrections, 439 Mich 158 (1992) (C(8) appropriate when no factual development could permit recovery)
Gray v. Morley, 460 Mich 738 (1999) (workers’ compensation is exclusive remedy for workplace injuries)
Hendrickson v. Arthur G. McKee Co., 6 Mich App 104 (1967) (failure to object to evidence before magistrate precludes raising admissibility on appeal)
Office Planning Group, Inc. v. Baraga-Houghton-Keweenaw Child Dev. Bd., 472 Mich 479 (2005) (statutory violation alone does not automatically create private cause of action)
City of South Haven v. Van Buren Co. Bd. of Comm’rs, 478 Mich 518 (2007) (court must determine whether legislature intended to create a private cause of action)
Lash v. City of Traverse City, 479 Mich 180 (2007) (legislative omission of remedies suggests no private right intended)
Camburn v. Northwest School Dist., 459 Mich 471 (1999) (appellate review of legal questions from Worker’s Compensation Appellate Commission)